Objectives:Many a times in clinical periodontology, the decision whether to prescribe prophylactic antibiotics or not, is perplexing.The present study was conducted to compare the bacteremias induced after periodontal flap surgeries with and without prophylactic antibiotics.Materials and Methods:The occurrence of postoperative bacteremia following periodontal flap surgery was studied in 30 patients. On these patients, 30 quadrant wise flap surgeries were carried out without any preoperative prophylactic antibiotics and 30 surgeries carried out after prophylactic administration of amoxycillin preoperatively. A blood sample was taken from each patient at the time of maximum surgical trauma and was cultured for micro-organisms and antibiotic sensitivity.Results:18 out of 60 blood samples were positive for micro-organisms. There was a significant reduction in post operative bacteremia after amoxycillin prophylaxis (x2 - 7.96 with P<0.01) as post operative bacteremia was found in 14 of the non medicated patients as compared to only 4 of the pre medicated patients. The micro-organisms encountered in the study are as follows:- 1) Staphylococcus albus coagulase negative, 2) Klebsiella, 3) Psedomonas aerugenosa, 4) Streptococcus viridans, 5) Alpha hemolytic streptococcus, 6) Neisseria catarrhalisConclusion:On the basis of the study, it is concluded that the incidence of postoperative bacteremia following periodontal flap surgery is not as high as previously reported. The clinical results show that Amoxicillin is highly effective in reducing postoperative bacteremia in periodontal flap surgery and thus in preventing the possible sequelae (Infective Endocarditis and other systemic maladies) in susceptible patients. However, cefotaxime and cephalexin may prove to be more effective in preventing the same.

Background:Gingival Recession defects are one of the most common defects for which patients seek periodontal treatment. Many treatment options are available for the management of gingival recession. Most of the treatments offered aim to treat the cause, cover the denuded root surface and produce a long term aesthetic result. The use of periosteal pedicle graft (PPG) is a recent innovation for the treatment of gingival recession defects and has gained much attention in a short span of time. Although studies have been done utilizing PPG successfully for the treatment of gingival recession defects (GRD) but it is still not clear, whether PPG technique should be included in the established list of techniques used to treat GRD? An effort has been made to arrive at a decision on the current utility of PPG in the treatment of GRD based on the scientific evidence available in literature.Materials and Methods:A review of current literature was done to critically evaluate the evidence related to the Periosteal pedicle graft technique.Results and Conclusion:Periosteal Pedicle Graft has come up as a viable treatment option for the treatment of GRD although it's still too early to predict the long-term results associated with PPG.

Background: Edentulism is one of the most commonly encountered condition affecting the oral cavity. Dental implants have emerged as a widely accepted prosthetic treatment option. However, lack of public awareness and cost of the treatment act as barriers which limit their applicability. Materials and Methods : A questionnaire-based survey was conducted in five dental colleges in the state of Himachal Pradesh, India to assess the knowledge, attitude and perception of participants regarding the importance of replacing missing teeth and dental implants. Statistical analysis Used: Epi-info software version 7. Results: Majority of the patients were partially edentulous and believed that replacement of missing teeth is important but only half of participants had undergone treatment for the same. A large number of patients were aware about tooth replacement options but the awareness regarding dental implants was scarce. Conclusion:High cost and lack of information seem to be the major barriers in delivering dental implant treatment. Efforts are needed to educate and spread the awareness about implants among general population.

Background:Various classification systems have been devised to classify gingival recession defects (GRDs). Recent evidence has raised many questions on the use of currently popular classification systems. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess various classification systems in the light of the current scientific literature.Methods:A comprehensive and systematic search was done to identify literature related to classification systems for GRD. Sources included books, journals, and online database. The search was done using the predefined criteria; 337 articles were initially identified through online database PubMed (Medline) and 12 from handsearch, of which a total of 10 full text articles were finally selected.Results:The classification systems which were included in the review included the classifications given by Sullivan and Atkins, Miller, Smith, Nordland and Tarnow, Kumar and Masamatti, and Mahajan. The systematic review revealed that the Sullivan and Atkins classification system for gingival recession was the most useful classification system for clinicians till the year 1985 in which P. D. Miller introduced the classification system for marginal tissue recession. From 1985 to till date, the Miller's classification system is the most frequently used and popular classification system.Conclusion:None of the classification systems for GRD fulfilled the ideal criteria; however, some of the recently introduced classification systems have evolved as a more comprehensive and viable alternative to already established classification systems.